From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #978 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Wednesday, February 19 2003 Volume 01 : Number 978 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 13:05:19 -0500 From: "Jamie Laulusa" Subject: Re: [AML] Gospel Allusions in Films Tony Markham wrote: >All >things testify of him (on some level) and any decent hero is automatically >a >Christ figure. The challenge then for us as an audience is to find him in >all >things. Even those blankety-blank "R" films... > In all things? Or in all *good* things? Is He in a book or movie that's just plain bad (as in, badly written/concieved/intended/ect.)? And is it worth it to find him in it? > > > >...that you can watch when you're old enough. Does your mom know you're on >the >internet talking to old people? > >Tony Markham >Delhi, NY > > I thought the R-rating was a restriction until 16. I'm two years past the age limit, so I'm late, aren't I? Mom told me to join. I think she got tired of forwarding stuff to me every time one of you said anything about Orson Scott Card. Besides, oh learned and wise one, you old people don't scare me. ~Jamie Laulusa _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 17:44:31 -0700 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: Re: [AML] Singles Ward Many thanks to Laraine Wilkins for setting such a positive and useful tone = for our continued colloquy on Singles Ward. A few final brief responses = to her last post: >First, I have to say, I don't blame you for hating The Singles Ward. It's = >more=20 >or less throwaway material. But I didn't have nearly as depressed a = >reaction as you.=20 As I've said, my reaction to the film was, at least initially, purely = visceral. I think to a certain degree it's defendable to say "I just hated = this film, I just responded emotionally", but there does come a point at = which we must back away from our emotions and actually, you know, think = about things. I'm grateful that your posts have given me space to do = that. =20 >As I've thought more about this, I can't leave the Cammie character=20 >alone. I still just don't see how she's so self-righteous. I'm trying = to=20 >decide if there's anything beyond personal taste that makes us relate to = >her differently.=20 Terrific question, of course. I've been searching myself for an answer to = that question. You quite liked her; I loathed her. But I can't help but = notice that your email address says 'Harvard.' And I live in Provo. So = we're from different worlds. And I'd rather I didn't live in Provo, and = have major league Utah issues to sort out. So perhaps there's some = trigger there for me. =20 >Well, this seems so much speculation. Which the film invites, because = it's=20 >about choices, or a bunch of cliched tropes that turn the film into = do-it- >yourself narrative.=20 The latter, I think. >But back to Cammie for one last moment. As I said, I related to her. = >Perhaps=20 >you wouldn't like me if you met me. Which I hope wouldn't be the case. Which I really hope would not be the case, of course. And which I think = is quite unlikely. I mean, any dramatic character is, of necessity, = limited to those few quick strokes of characterization provided by the = writer and actor; no dramatic character can ever hope to approach the = complexity of an actual living breathing human. In this case, Cammie is = hardly a multi-dimensional rounded character; we surely agree there. = We're reading a few signifiers, and reading them differently. Misreading = them, both of us, I suspect. =20 >I've=20 >certainly been accused of being self-righteous before.=20 Well, as my dear friend Richard Johnson pointed out, it would be hard to = top the self-righteous and arrogant tone I've found myself assuming in = relation to this film. I'm embarrassed by the tone of several of my = posts. Granted, I hated the film. Poor poor pitiful me. Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 22:09:42 -0700 From: "Jacob Proffitt" Subject: RE: [AML] Slate Commentary on CleanFlicks Lawsuit - ---Original Message From: D. Michael Martindale > > Put an other way, do you think MST3K was evil and wrong for making=20 > > jokes over a film? >=20 > MST3K procured the rights to do it for each film. Which is why the show stopped (did it start up again, or is that re-runs = I hear about occasionally?). The success of MST3K lead to the = rights-holders asking for more money which raised the cost of the show beyond their = ability to continue it. Jacob Proffitt - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 06:02:53 -0700 From: "Alan Rex Mitchell" Subject: [AML] Henry B. EYRING, _Because He First Loved Us_ (Review) Because He First Loved Us A Collection of Discourses by Henry B. Eyring 2002, Deseret Book Company, Salt Lake City 223 pp. Hardcover. $19.95 retail.=20 Reviewed by Alan Rex Mitchell. Henry B. Eyring is the least senior apostle in the Twelve, and he is = turning 70 this year although he doesn't look much over 55. His resume, = gleaned from the back flap, reads: U of Utah BS and MS, Ph.D. from = Harvard, Professor at Stanford Business School, President of Ricks = College, Commissioner of the Church Education System, Quorum of Seventy, = Counselor in Presiding Bishopric, Apostle since 1996.=20 His father was the renowned chemist Henry Eyring, his aunt was Camilla = Eyring Kimball, and President Kimball was his uncle. Years ago, I = enjoyed the senior Henry Eyring's Faith of a Scientist, which jovially = described his life and career. (He chose a career in academia over his = training as a mining engineer because of the lofty pursuit of...he = didn't want to get hurt in the mines.) It would be interesting to = contrast the lives and letters of Henry and his son Henry B. as a study = on personality in the last quarter century. Their writing and speaking = styles are certainty different. Henry was folksy, self-deprecating in a = Reaganesque way (although he could have probably given the Gipper = lessons), and fascinated by life, nature of chemical bonds, and the = joyful nuances of living. One could imagine him as a crazy uncle who = would occasionally drop by for dinner. I understand he only gave one = talk with a few variations, much like his contemporary LeGrande = Richards. I heard the talk when I was a freshman engineering student and = Eyring was the featured fireside speaker at the LDS Institute. His = eccentricity was legendary according to a friend of mine who took = general chemistry from him in the 1970s. Maybe Henry B. is like that in real life. I don't know. I've only really = met him once, at a funeral last summer, and that may not have been a = representative sample of his personality. After reading the book, I = wanted to read his memoir, his autobiography, or at least a collection = of his favorite Family Home Evenings. I wanted to get to know him, his = mother, father, brother, step mother, wife, children, etc., but other = than the funeral I've only seen and heard him at General Conference.=20 And this book is like Conference. That only makes sense, because all 21 = chapters are conference address, BYU fireside talks, CES fireside talks = for the period of 1982 to 2002. (Memo to self: keep electronic copies of = all your church talks, in the off chance that... never mind.) Each = chapter quotes scripture, modern prophets, and occasionally has a = business metaphor. The best parts are the personal stories, which are = limited to less than two per chapter. On a personal story scale, they = rate about 65% of Thomas Monson. That's a passing grade, if you grade on = a curve, but you get the impression that he didn't give the talks to = tell stories about himself.=20 This book contains solid talks about subjects ranging from repentance, = our destiny, Christ-centered worship, spiritual debt management, gifts = of love, etc. But why did Deseret Book publish this book when there are = all those old Ensigns at stacked at the local DI?=20 That is a question AML could ask Sheri Dew, but I think we know the = answers: Henry B. Eyring is a great man, the talks are inspiring, and = they can sell this book. It's based on the formula that customers come = home to DB to shop for church books to give as gifts to relatives. My = mother has a birthday coming up. After that, she can give it to one of = the grandkids.=20 - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 09:29:47 +0200 From: Tom Johnson Subject: Re: [AML] NICHOLES, _Angels Round About_ (Review) Jeff, I've never actually read the Nicholes book you reviewed (other than a dozen sample pages), but about 5 years ago when I was at BYU working in the alumni house her name came up in the who-has-done-what profile section, so I interviewed her. The profile was supposed to appear on the alumni webpage but never did. I just dug it out of my archive files, and thought I would post it here. Lorie Nicholes Publishes Story of Escape From Nazi Germany By Tom Johnson Lorie Nicholes' new novel, Angels Round About, has proven to be an appealing and popular seller since its publication in August, 1998. Although a work of fiction, the story itself is primarily factual, based on the story of the author's mother as a young woman in Austria, seeking to fulfil the admonition of an LDS apostle in leaving her homeland to strive for a new life in America. Miracles occurred as, time after time, strangers appeared to help young Hilde Edler overcome insurmountable obstacles in her quest. Since Nicholes was young she has been fascinated by her mother's story. Several years after her mother's death, Nicholes began collecting anecdotes from her brothers and sisters, and even traveled twice to Europe to talk with her grandmother about Hilde's childhood in the impoverished world of Europe between the world wars. Nicholes said, "I had to do a great deal of research on the history of the country, the culture, lifestyle and politics of the people, and the events which allowed Hitler to take over Austria. I gained a lot of understanding. But one of the most fascinating things about my quest for information and insight was the feeling that people on the other side of mortality were helping me to learn and discover the things I needed to know." Nicholes' original concept for the book was a fictionalized biography of three generations of strong women: her great-grandmother, grandmother, and mother. Her grandmother, a woman named Rosa, had the most exciting life history of the three women, and so the first few drafts focused on her as the main protagonist. The multi-generational novel took more than 8 years to finish, and was eventually titled Iron Rose. But work on the novel ceased in 1991 when Nicholes had to return to school and then to work to earn a living. The book was put on hold for 5 years until Nicholes felt constrained to continue once again. "I had this urgent drive inside to go back to the book--this was a story that needed to be told. The feeling nagged at me constantly. So I took an enormous chance. I left my job as an media designer for BYU's Instructional Technology Center and went home to finish the book. That took another two years and then my savings ran out. But the book wasn't done, and I was hurting--I knew I had to get the thing done, fast. So I made a pledge to myself that I would get up every morning and not do nothing until I had written a twelve-page chapter. I did it, and within another six weeks the 750-page first draft was finished. Successive drafts went very quickly, and I began sending it out to publishers." About that time, an interested editor suggested that although Nicholes had intended her novel for a national market, there was a rich LDS audience who would react very favorably to her story and style. The editor and Stellar Publishing Company asked Nicholes if she would be willing to pull the story of her mother, who was LDS, out of the larger novel, and publish a smaller novel directed at the LDS market. Nicholes recounts, "The wolf at the door was a very strong motivator, and I said I would do it. It took another three months to fill in essential background information to make the shorter story flow well, and my editor suggested I leave out some of the more depressing anecdotes which were part of the real story. Within an astonishing six months of their first offer, the book was in print." "I also learned that in writing for a Mormon market you are strongly advised to focus on an upbeat story. Mormons in general do not like depressing or tragic scenarios. They've got enough sadness in their own lives, and want to read things that brighten life. Since that was my market, I consented to soften some of the distressing events in the original story, and heighten those incidents which were triumphs of the spirit, the overcoming of obstacles. That's one advantage of writing a novel. A biography has to stick to 'just the facts, Ma'am'. A novel has the latitude to manipulate the facts and even fabricate events to achieve desired ends." The result was Angels Round About, a novel one third the size of the original Iron Rose. Angels Round About begins in media res, with Hilde in line nervously awaiting inspection from Nazi officials at the seaport where she is to set sail for England and America. While waiting she reviews the events which led to this arduous and dangerous journey. Hilde had joined the Mormon church in 1930. Later, in 1935, the apostle, John A. Widstoe, visited her Vienna branch during a tour of European missions. After his speech, Widstoe shook hands with the members. In meeting teenage Hilde, he looked at her intensely and said: "I feel impressed to tell you that you must go to the United States. It may be difficult but I promise you that if you make every effort, the Lord will place angels round about to open your way." Hilde saved her money for two years for the trip, but by then Hitler had annexed Austria. Every attempt Hilde made to leave was blocked. The details of her adventures with her various problems provide the greatest tension in the book. Many times, when Hilde ran into an impassible wall, a complete stranger would show up, solve her problems, and then vanish from her life. After surmounting many challenges, Hilde Finally arrived in the United States. There she had a wonderful romance with a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin. The book ends shortly after their marriage. But in real life Hilde went on to have ten children. Her husband became a much loved BYU professor. And eventually, because of Hilde, more than 2,000 people joined the Church. In the last years of her life Hilde was loved and admired by hundreds of people who still speak of her as a moving force in their lives. The names of the characters in the book were changed to protect the privacy of those who actually lived it. Speaking of the publishing and promotional process involved in bringing out a book, Nicholes said, "One of the things I've learned is that every fifth person in the church has written a book. No kidding! When I went to the LDS booksellers association in August, there must have been 50,000 different books, tapes, and artworks being sold there. I couldn't believe it--everybody has written a book. I have learned that you don't write books to get rich. You write books because you really love to write, or else you have a story you feel you absolutely must tell. I felt that I had a great story to tell, and whether I was a good writer or not, it simply had to be told. I'm very pleased with it's reception. I'm extremely glad that a few people who are well regarded in the literary field think I've made a good job of it. And, yes, the next one is already on the way!" - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:06:13 -0600 From: pdhunter@wt.net Subject: [AML] Neil LABUTE (dir.), _Possession_ (Review) Review by Preston Hunter "Possession" Feature film Released theatrically: 2002 Directed by Neil LaBute Screenplay by David Henry Hwang, Laura Jones and Neil LaBute Starring: Gwyneth Paltrow, Aaron Eckhart, Jeremy Northam, Jennifer Ehle Production and Distribution Companies: Baltimore Spring Creek, Contagious Films, Focus Features, USA Films, Warner Bros. Neil LaBute's 4th feature film, "Possession," was released on video and DVD on Tuesday, 11 February 2003. As probably everyone know, "Possession" is LaBute's adaptation of the immensely popular same-titled novel by A.S. Byatt. The story opens with Roland (Aaron Eckhart) discovering previously unknown letters written by the subject of his studies, renowned (fictional) poet Randolph Henry Ash, who is famous for his life-long devotion to his wife and his writing dedicated to her. The letters were written to another 19th century English poet, Christabel LaMotte, who was thought to have been committed to her relationship with a female painter. Roland seeks out the preeminent authority on LaMotte to investigate these findings further. The researcher is an icy British academic played by Gwenyth Paltrow. They investigate the history-changing connection between Ash and LaMotte, retracing a trip the two poets took together. The barriers between the researchers melt and their relationship mirrors in some ways the relationship between their research subjects. This is both a mystery and a love story. Scenes of the 19th century are interspersed with the contemporary story of the researchers learning about it. One of LaBute's greatest accomplishments with "Possession" is the fact that this acclaimed but dense and complicated book is rendered quite understandable on film. "Possession" is an impressive and accomplished work of cinematic art. Its production budget was a reported $25 million, and this shows up on the screen. The cinematography is elegant and appropriate. The acting is world-class. Academy Award-winner Gwenyth Paltrow stars and her talent is matched by LaBute's fellow BYU graduate Aaron Eckhart. The movie was filmed on location in England, much of it in real locations specified in the book, such as the London Library. This is not necessarily an "easy" movie to get into. It starts off slow and it never serves up a car chase or explosion. It really is about poets and literary research. But I thoroughly enjoyed it and will certainly watch it again. This is an amazingly romantic movie. It is sincere, not schmaltzy. It is nice that the movie is not shallow or hollow. Although not overtly religious, there are are a number of intriguing themes and ideas. After some slow going in the opening scenes my interest was really engaged and I was drawn into the parallel love stories. There is no question that the quality of filmmaking here is higher than can be found in any LDS Cinema movies, even Dutcher's "Brigham City" or Davis' "The Other Side of Heaven." This is not only because of the movie's $25 million production budget. LaBute is a very talented director and screenwriter, but this isn't the only reason. Thesource material was top-rate (Byatt's book won the Booker Prize). Another major factor is the talent of the two leads, Gwenyth Paltrow and Aaron Eckhart. With seeming ease they manage to make wonderful and watchable characters out of two literary researchers. Although an all-around excellent movie, I can see in "Possession" the limitations that prevented it from garnering more critics' awards than it did. Although a wide-open film set in various locales in England and France, it does lack the sheer scope of movies such as "The Twin Towars" and "Gangs of New York." But I would heartily recommend this to fans of Latter-day Saint filmmaking, not because its themes are necessarily specific to our interests, but because the level of LaBute's craft is something to relish and aspire to. CONTENT: The following paragraphs are about offensive content to audiences who prefer LDS Cinema and videos available at Deseret Book. This is for information only, and is not meant to imply that such material is appropriate or inappropriate. "Possession" is rated PG-13, and is LaBute's first movie that is not rated R. For Latter-day Saints who do not watch R-rated movies, "Possession" can serve as a great introduction to the most successful Latter-day Saint director of live action dramatic films working today. There is little that would be considered offensive, but there are a few things to note. The only violence is some scuffling between English professors. The characters are poets and academics and the dialogue is lofty and intelligent. There is virtually no vulgarity except for one "sh--" word. I did not recall any profanity, but ScreenIt.com indicates a total of 12 profane exclamations, along the lines of "For God's sake" and "Jesus." ScreenIt.com also points out 1 "damn" and 1 "hell." Relatively mild compared to most movies, and not even on the same scale as LaBute's previous movies. There is no nudity. The potentially most offensive aspects of "Possesion" are the fact that one character is a lesbian, and a love scene between the historical characters of Randolph Henry Ash (Jeremy Northam) and Christabel LaMotte (Jennifer Ehle). Blanche, the lesbian character, is Christabel LaMotte's companion. There is never anything shown happening between them beyond holding hands. The key plot point in the movie is that Christabel had an affair with a man, Randolph Henry Ash. Christabel is loyal to her female friend and companion until Blanche commits suicide, but her true love is Ash. LaBute displays a realistic understanding of many aspects of human nature and clearly doesn't subscribe to some of the silly, politically correct notions of lesbianism that are quite popular. But "Possession" is also a fairly faithful adaptation of Byatt's book, so it's not like LaBute went out of his way to contrivean anti-lesbian plot. The characters are simply realistically portrayed people and there's no agenda behind the plot. The scene most likely to keep "Possession" off of Deseret Book shelves is the love scene between Ash and LaMotte. LaBotte is fully covered wearing an ankle-length nightgown, but Ash appears to be wearing nothing, although he is obscured by LaMotte and blankets. It's fairly brief and discreet, but definitely earns the movie a PG-13 rating. As for Aaron Eckhart and Gwenyth Paltrow... I don't think there's anything between them that couldn't be done in a slightly daring BYU-produced play. There is not even any sex implied between them during the course of the movie. In summary, this isn't a family movie, but it isn't meant to be one. I have no concern that kids will watch the movie and see something I wouldn't want them to, because no kid will last past the first 20 minutes of library research, poetry auctions, and persuasive academia. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 16:30:59 -0600 From: "Lisa Olsen Tait" Subject: Re: [AML] Defining Aesthetics (was Manipulative Art) - -Fred C Pinnegar wrote: Lisa Tait says: Fred (or anyone), This is very well said! Can you give me any references for this definition? (Not that I doubt your ability to come up with it on your own!) The reason I ask is that I've been dusting off my old research on the earliest Mormon Home Literature (Susa Young Gates's serialized novels from the 1890s) with an eye to hopefully publishing an article or two. This definition of aesthetics is at the heart of my critical approach, which is to look at these texts in terms of what cultural work they were attempting to perform for their author and readers, rather than holding them up to a certain "literary" standard. But your definition of aesthetics is also germane to the many discussions we've recently been having on the List about movies and so forth. The people who produce Singles Ward and who write romance novels, for example, operate from a different aesthetic than others do. And as with the home literature of 100 years ago, when we try to evaluate someone else's work by a different aesthetic, we often reject or disapprove of it. Which ultimately says very little about the work itself and a lot about us. But if we attempt to understand the aesthetic from which a work of "art" (however loosely we decide to use that term) was created, we can at least understand it, even if we still don't appreciate it. Which works better on historical works, I think, than on contemporary ones because it's easier to sort out the various cultural and aesthetic issues in retrospect. Maybe? For example, I hate Saturday's Warrior. But I think we could do some interesting analysis of the specific cultural/historical, even religious/doctrinal place that it arose from, which could help to explain its popularity and resonance within a certain group of people. All of which does NOT mean that I like Singles Ward. No matter what it attempted to do. Thanks. Lisa Tait - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 01 Jan 1998 03:50:40 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] _Ender's Game_ Movie luannstaheli wrote: > Annette, > I agree. Ender's Game was such a powerful ending, I hope I'm not disappointed. I > also loved Ender's Shadow, but for different reasons. I can see why they might > decide to combine the two though because Shadow's ending was anti0climatic after > reading Game. They're filming them together because it would be virutally impossible to film them separately--at least using the same actors. The age difference of the actors between films would be noticeable and distracting. As for the "powerful" ending, I take issue with that concept. I think Card ruined the ending by telegraphing it too much. It's a flaw that was in the original short story, and it was carried over into the novel, even though Card obviously saw a problem with it because he made a small adjustment that seemed to be trying to address the problem. But the adjustment didn't work. The "surprise" ending is still telegraphed, just in a different way. The real solution would have been to not telegraph it in the first place. There was no reason to. If foreshadowing was the intent, there was already plenty of foreshadowing without the telegraphing part. It just goes to prove that the story of "Ender's Game" is so layered with value that even ruining the "surprise" ending hasn't ruined the book. Sorry to be so vague about what I'm talking about, but I don't want to ruin the ending (even more) for those that haven't read it. - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 11:00:58 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] Diversity of Mormonism (was: Singles Ward) Tom Johnson wrote: > I agree with some of the biting criticisms made of The Singles Ward--I too > found it too cliche and caricature driven. However, what I found refreshing > was the complete rejection of any sort of move to appeal to a non-LDS > audience. It's nice to see someone say hey, I'm not going to try to be a > tour-guide/artist by excising all inside LDS jokes, sanitizing possibly > incriminating depictions of Mormons, or holding my tongue on what I feel is > ridiculous because I don't want others to get the wrong impression. This is the one criticism of _Singles Ward_ that I reject. The Salt Lake Tribune's movie critic Sean P. Means (non- or lapsed LDS I'm pretty sure) makes a big deal (in a negatve sense) of the exclusionary nature of _Singles Ward_. He's still harps on _Singles Ward_ exclusionary approach in his review of _The R.M._ I have no idea what's wrong with a culture telling stories or jokes to itself that nobody else will get. As long as that's not what the entire art of that culture is like, what on earth is wrong with it? If that irritates Sean P. Means, well, here's the world's smallest violin playing "My Heart Bleeds for You." - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2003 20:49:48 -0700 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] The Way We're Wired. . . . At 01:35 PM 2/11/03 -0500, you wrote: >(Having said that, I should mention that Eric Samuelsen's play "The Way We're >Wired," currently at the Nauvoo Theatrical Society, does need an audience. >Or, more precisely, the artists and the theatre need an audience if they want >to keep producing LDS plays. So let's all go!) I attended the play Saturday night, and found it well worth seeing. As with Eric's play "Peculiarities," the characters were rich enough for me to think about them a good deal afterwards. And I hope we'll discuss them on this list after the run is over and we won't be giving anything away. I thought the set was great--it has been for every play I've seen by the Nauvoo Theatrical Society--and I enjoyed the performances. Scott Bronson is one of my favorite actors. I tried to get him to explain to me once how he does what he does. He managed to give me thrills and chills, but I still can't do it myself. It's really interesting to watch somebody you know being, well, somebody else! Do what Richard said, if you can. Go see this play, and support Thom's and Scott's brave efforts in providing a venue for LDS-flavored drama. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 21:08:00 -0600 From: Jonathan Langford Subject: [AML] Out Sick Folks, I am down with the flu, hence no posts today (Tuesday, Feb. 18). I hope to be back online tomorrow. Jonathan Langford AML-List Moderator - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 01:53:21 GMT From: "Jeffrey Needle" Subject: [AML] WEYLAND, _Cheyenne in New York_ (Review) Review =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Title: Cheyenne in New York Author: Jack Weyland Publisher: Bookcraft Year Published: 2003 Number of Pages: 288 Binding: Softback ISBN: 1-57008-909-4 Price: $13.95 Reviewed by Jeffrey Needle When "Cheyenne in New York" arrived, I was in a bit of a quandary. My prior experience with Jack Weyland novels was not altogether positive. I've always found him to be a bit formulaic, and often too preachy for my liking. His novels, of course, have been very popular among the LDS youth reading crowd, and, frankly, given his audience, he's a pretty good writer, skilled with words and able to present his story in a readable manner. This is Weyland's 25th published book. This is a great milestone for any writer. Anyone who has tried to write a book knows the discipline needed to map out, launch, and actually complete a project. It helps to have an intimate knowledge of your subject. Weyland knows Mormon life very well. His books live and breathe Mormon idealism. In this current volume, the author offers, in my opinion, a more textured and complex book than his previous offerings. To be sure, his usual themes of chastity among youth, loves gained and lost, the importance of living the Gospel in everyday life -- these are all here and accounted for. But this is combined with a riveting account of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. "Cheyenne" is Cheyenne Durrant. A native of Idaho, a child of devout Mormon parents, and on summer break from BYU, she arrives in New York City to intern for the summer with a large ad agency. There she meets B.D. (Ben) Morelli, described on the back cover of the book as "a typical, brash, up-and-coming New York City ad agency executive." Cheyenne is assigned to Ben for the summer, and Ben does not welcome this intrusion. Cheyenne is smart, spirited, and not willing to yield an inch to Ben as they pursue a breakfast cereal account. Worse, she insists on calling him "Beady," something he finds very irritating. But as the two spend time together, Ben learns that Cheyenne is a capable, quick thinker. She has qualities that seem to attract everyone but him. When Ben takes Cheyenne home for a family reunion, his entire family falls in love with Cheyenne. They all hope the two will ultimately marry, but Ben will hear nothing of it. But nature, and the dangers of propinquity, take their course. Ben soon falls hopelessly in love with Cheyenne. But this is a match that simply won't work. Ben is not a member of the Church. And -- gasp -- he drinks coffee! The question that hangs in the air -- will Ben see enough in Cheyenne to motivate him to change his life? Will he join the Church? And if he does, will he join for the right reasons? Weyland has Ben narrating the entire book. The many self-effacing references are often charming and sometimes surprising. Ben is often surprised at how Cheyenne has affected his life, his way of living, his way of thinking. Yes, he frequently comes up short, and sometimes he acts like a fool. But this, I suspect, is what real life is like. Fiction writers are notorious for introducing story arcs that try to explain how the characters get from point A to point B. Weyland is no exception. And here is where I have a problem. In order for the story as a whole to be believable, the pieces must be believable. Weyland's story arcs are often strained and stretch our credibility. Let me set it up: Cheyenne's parents are very conservative, very protective of their daughter. Her father is described as someone who would meet his daughter's less desirable suitors at the door with a shotgun in his hand. They send her to BYU, presumably to keep her among the righteous. Now, she's off to New York City, for a whole summer, all on her own, and her father lends her his truck so she can drive, alone, across the country. One must wonder why her parents would permit her to spend an entire summer, without a chaperone, in the Big City. In fact, then Ben is introduced to Cheyenne's father, he comes across as a rabid dog, questioning Ben again and again as to whether he's sleeping with Cheyenne. Why would such a man allow his daughter to travel, cross-country, by herself, to New York? It didn't add up. Later, at the time of the WTC attacks, Cheyenne is back at BYU when she hears of the disaster. She talks with Ben, learning that Ben's father, grandfather and uncle have likely perished in the collapse of the Towers. She decides to drop out of school and come and help Ben with his neice and nephew, his mother, and the rest of the family, all of whom adore Cheyenne. She applies for a refund on her tuition, apparently gets it in a day, goes to a car agency and purchases a vehicle (her father disapproves of her decision, and won't lend her the truck again), and takes off for New York and Ben and his family. Cheyenne doesn't have enough money to buy a reliable vehicle, so Ben tells the salesman he'll kick in $5,000, gives the salesman his credit card number, a fax number, and tells him he'll sign the faxed copy of the credit slip when he can get back into the city and to his office and the fax machine. Does all this sound just a bit too tidy? In the wake of the terrorist attacks, does a salesman in an auto agency just hand over a vehicle on the promise of some person in New York City? Does BYU issue tuition refunds so quickly? Does Cheyenne really know what she's doing? That being said, if you can get beyond the obvious difficulties in the transitions, this is a very good story. Weyland's depiction of the WTC attacks, and their aftermath, are riveting reading. And he spares nothing in his description of their effect on Ben's family. He explores the meaning of family and of love, of parental disaffection and the fracturing of families. And, as would be expected, he plumbs the depths of how the Gospel can enter into people's lives and change them for the better. Weyland develops the main characters convincingly. Their interaction is brought along at a leisurely, but sure, pace. As their love grows, so does the acknowledgement of how far they each need to go emotionally before there can be a real connection between them. Some of the characters surprised me. Without giving away the end of the book, Cheyenne's father brings the story to a close with an act of extraordinary Christian charity. It came out of nowhere; I was completely surprised. I read the book in two sittings. Because there were several story threads, I found myself wanting to know, not only how each would be resolved, but how they would intertwine and mature together. Weyland does a good job in bringing closure to the various story lines. Older teens and young adults will certainly enjoy this book. There's plenty in here to cause them to think more deeply about the nature of tragedy and grief, the importance of family, and the enduring power of the Gospel to change lives. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #978 ******************************